Washington, D.C.—In a move that came as a shock both in this city and throughout the planet on which it is located, Standard & Poor’s late Monday downgraded Earth from its unique HHH rating—the only one in the galaxy—to HH+.

The coveted HHH rating—meaning, “extremely habitable”—has become indefensible, the ratings agency said, due to continuing failures to balance the atmospheric carbon budget and an increasingly toxic political debate that renders better policies unlikely any time soon.

Under the new HH+ rating, the Earth is still considered “highly habitable” for humans. However, S&P also changed the planet’s outlook to “negative,” suggesting the possibility of further downgrades.

Critics Cite Dearth of Spaceships

Criticism came fast and furious. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agreed with S&P about the threat of global warming, but made numerous obscure and highly technical criticisms of its carbon calculations, and then sent these to American journalists who don’t understand the word “albedo” and can’t even convert Celsius to Fahrenheit.

“This is not their area of expertise,” said the IPCC in a written statement. “However, we cannot explain ourselves further without peer review. Our next report will be out in about five years.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce was even more scathing. “Even as S&P downgraded Earth, investors—those who choose to live here—are proving the silliness of this action,” said Chamber spokesman Terry Form. “If the Earth had really become less habitable, market forces would kick in, and we would see a booming spaceship industry. That’s just not happening.”

One rare supporter of S&P’s decision was the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute, popularly known as SETI, located in Mountain View, CA.

“Look, there’s only a snowball’s chance in hell that we’re going to hear from another intelligent civilization,” said SETI senior astronomer Carly Sagan. “But we’re going to keep trying, and thanks to S&P we’ll probably get more funding. As this action shows, Earth’s residents needsomethingto pin their hopes on right now.”

The search for extrasolar planets also proceeds apace, but so far no planet orbiting any star has received a rating close to Earth’s. The next closest is Mars at “-H,” meaning habitable only after vast improvements.

Mars itself was downgraded during the 1990s, once S&P realized that the Face on Mars was merely an optical illusion (a flub that some charge has significantly undermined the agency’s credibility).

Denialism Blamed, Blame Denied

In a recent interview, S&P senior director Troy Easter gave rare insight into one critical factor behind his agency’s action–citing a group of so-called carbon budget “deniers” who have become increasingly prominent in Washington and on the world stage.

“These people are willing to hold a gun to the planet’s head,” Easter said. “Without them, no carbon balancing can happen. And they don’t even think escalating atmospheric carbon dioxide is a problem.”

“This is not the kind of rhetoric you expect to find on triple-H rated planets,” Easter said.

So-called climate skeptics and their political supporters quickly fired back at S&P—even as they also blamed U.S. President Barack Obama for the ratings downgrade and the carbon budget gap, and also for continuing to try to reason with them and showing inadequate leadership.

“Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased dramatically during his term,” said Republican Rep. Michele Badlands, who display a chart comparing the Obama administration’s emissions with those of the George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan governments. “And anyways, planets have shown a remarkable ability to ‘breathe back in’ carbon, when not weighed down by Big Government.”

For that reason, Badlands said, even though she blamed Obama for the ratings change, she wasn’t actually worried about it. “Carbon is good for life,” she said, reiterating a familiar campaign slogan. “Plus, it’s my favorite color.”

Compared to what you idiots have got coming to you, it’s really nothing, considering the irreparable economic damage your fraudulent shennanigans have caused.

Expect more of it, and worse.”

Great! So you admit you are a troll, here for no other purpose but heckling & harassment. So if you are banned (again), it won’t be a surprise to you & your usual statement of “what are desmogblog trying to hide?” will have some true meaning for you then. They are trying to hide the shit.

Please allow my one venture into the world of ad-hom laziness of replying. I’m sorry but reading the back-and-forth commentary here today one thing is very clear. You look like such a TOOL trying to defend an indefensible position here! At least Chris Mooney has the brains to get paid for what he does. You, on the other hand, come across as a mindless zombie follower who can’t see the forest for the trees. Please get a clue, ok? It’s embarrassing even for the people on the other side of the fence. H.

“You look like such a TOOL trying to defend an indefensible position here!”

Hank, my interests are alligned with this blog. Yours arent. Therefore you are a troll. You have no valid input here just jibes. A mere mindless drone carpet bombing bullshit like the rest of your denier mates. Its sad really. If its all over as you believe, then why are you here?

I confess, I’m actually the persona management terminator, sent from the future to assassinate global warming belief. I have an advanced sarcasm unit, capable of extreme satire to fool the average human. Muhahhaha.

Speaking of gravy, is it worth noting that Chris Mooney makes his living as an author, writing political attack books against anyone who doesn’t subscribe to his brand of eco-fundamentalism?

I agree! The planet has become completely uninhabitable, as evidenced by the fact that mass starvation and disease are sweeping around the world! We’re all doomed!!! The population is dwindling and people are dying like flies, younger than ever before! The stench of rotting corpses is everywhere under the smog-choked sky!

The current governments of Canada and of Alberta are far more concerned about having good PR about the tarsands than they are about actually getting off their butts and cleaning up the tarsands.

I find it easy to believe that those stupid Conservative governments are wasting my tax dollars on paying liars to post on various blogs about the tarsands and about AGW in general. And one paid commenter might be using multiple sock puppets.

The Conservatives lie so much they are not capable of recognizing the truth any more. And of course they hate science because it requires objectivity and intellectual honesty, something they are incapable of achieving any more.

Nature has promulgated planet wide natural disasters over millions of years. Plant material has been converted into toxic goo - forming deposits all over and in some case mixing into perfectly clean sand.

A horrible problem covered over with a thin layer of topsoil.

An now in an heroic effort to green the planet, we are peeling away that top soil and cleaning the sand, leaving a planet in better condition than we found it.

“…He also stole. At least three of the other photos in the set were taken by internationally recognized photographers and used without permission…” http://understory.ran.org/2011/08/16/breaking-ethical-oil-campaign-uses-stolen-faked-photos/

While Lindzen & co have recently presented a paper that puts the maximum increase in the global temperature in the outyears in a lower range than the IPCC predictions, with a high probability, the blog below is by a physicist who (like a couple of other physicists before him), makes the case the there is no greenhouse gas effect. However, this gentleman presents his case in much simpler to understand terms than those earlier mathematical proofs (which probably nobody but the authors understand).

Political responses won’t hack it on this blog. If you don’t understand the science, don’t even bother. http://theendofthemystery.blogspot.com/2010/11/venus-no-greenhouse-effect.html

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.

There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.